One or more of the Following Statements may affect this Docum

This document has been reproduced from the best copy furnished by th

organizational source. It is being released in the interest of making avai

much information as possible.

This document may contain data, which exceeds the sheet parameters. 

furnished in this condition by the organizational source and is the best c

available.

This document may contain tone-on-tone or color graphs, charts and/or 

which have been reproduced in black and white.

This document is paginated as submitted by the original source.

Portions of this document are not fully legible due to the historical nature 

of the material. However, it is the best reproduction available from the o

submission.

Produced by the NASA Center for Aerospace Information (CASI)
r

i

i

r

s

t

1

1

S

I

gy 

Program Plan

D483-10012.3

spac(--A,.. Station

S

'N stf^r s Tech

(Add-( )>> "l ^ttihl

-W

(nAJA-C^+- 171u17) -FACE SIA.ICS SYSTEMS N65-_`_ce)

`iNCLu(a1 S1 LI D Y 1ALL-CN 1A K) . YCLJM1 3:

'GY ALVubLkMLN1 iiC il? FLAN Final

btEul*_ (rcelay Feto;Eace C(,., Stattla, unc1a1

Waan CSCL 22A G3/12 21199

I'OE/AVG

Febr:. ary, 1985 SPECTRA RESEARCH SYSTEMS (SRS)

nology Study
(^ SPACE STATION SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY STUDY

(ADD-ON TASK)

t ^

Final Report

VOLUME III

( TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM

\

PLAN

r4 0

D483-10012-3

Conducted for NASA Marshall Space Flight Center

}

Under Contrcct Number NAS8-34893

February 1985

Fes,

Boeing Aerospace Company

Spectra Research Systems

i
L

FOREWORD

^. The Space Station Systems Technology Study ( Contract NA S8 - 34893 S/A 8) was initiated

in June 1984 and to be completed in February 1985. The study was conducted for the

National Aeronautics and Space Adminstration, Marshall Space Flight Center, by the

Boeing Aerospace Company with Spectra Research Systems as a subcontractor. The

study final report Is documented In three volumes.

D483-10012-1 Vol. I Executive Summary

13483 .10012 -2 Vol. II Trade Study and Technology Selection Technical Report

D483- 10012-3 Vol. III Technology Advancement Program Plan

Mr. Robert F. Nixon was the Contracting Officer's Representative and Study Technical

Manager for the Marshall Space Flight Center. Dr. Richard L. Olson was the Boeing study

manager with Mr. Paul Meyer as the technical leader and Mr. Rodney Bradford managed

the Spectra Research Systems effort.

^..,i
Page

1

3

5

5

7

9

11

11

C(

l

^a #

^_ D

1

1• D483-10012-3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 INTEGRATING CONTROLLER FOR SPACE STATION AUTONOMY

2.1 Introduction

2.2 IC System Modeling

2.2.1 Description and Benefits

2.2.2 Technical Approach

2.2.3 Facility Requirements and Candidate Facilities

2.2.4 Schedule

2.2.5 Resources

3

2.3 IC Expert System/Conventional Microprocessor Software Interfaces

2.3.1 Description and Benefits

2.3.2 Technical Approach

2.3.3 Facility Requirements and Candidate Facilities

2.3.4 Schedules

2.3.5 Resources

2.4 Compact Lightweight Inference Processor for Space Applications

2.4.1 Description and Benefits

2.4.2 Technical Approach

2.4.3 Facility Requirements and Candidate Facilities

2.4.4 Schedules

2.4.5 Resources

3.0 CONTROLS AND DISPLAYS

3.1 introduction

3.2 Wide Field-of-View Head-Up Display

3.2.1 Description and Benefits

3.2.2 Technical Approach

3.2.3 Facility Requirements and Candidate Facilities

3.2.4 Schedule

iii

11

14

14

16

16

19

21

21

21

23

23

26

29

29

29

29

33

36

36
D483-10012-3

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

3.2.5 Resources 39

3.3 High Performance Color Flat Panel LCD Display 39

3.3.1 Description and Benefits 39

3.3.2 Technical Approach 41

3.3.3 Facility Requirements and Candidate Facilities 41

3.3.4 Schedule 44.

3.3.5 Resources 44

3.4 Small High Performance Color Programmable Multifunction Switch 44

3.4.1 Description and Benefits 44

3.4.2 Technical Approach 44 

3.4.3 Facility Requirements and Candidate Facilities 48 

3.4.5 Resources 51

iv 
d

D483-10012-3

LIST OF FIGURES

NUMBER TITLE Page

E

1.0-1 Task 3 Flow Diagram 2

2.2-1 Flow Chart for Integrating Controller Functions 6

2.2-2 Logic Flow Diagram for Space Station Model Development 8

2.2-3 Schedule for Space Station Subsystem Simulation Development Plan 12

2.3-1 Logic Flow for IC Expert System/Conventional Microprocessor Software

Interfaces 15

2.3-2 Schedule for IC Expert System/Conventional Microprocessor Software

Interfaces 18

-- 2.4-1 Logic Floe; for Development of Compact Lightweight Inference Processor

for Space Applications 22

2.4-2 Schedule for Development of Compact Lightweight Inference

\T Processor for Space Application 25

i 3.2-1 Conventional HUD Layout 31

3.2-2 Diffraction Optics HUD Layout 32

(_ 3.2-3 Logic Flow Diagram for WFOV/HUD Model Development 34 }

- 3.2-4 Schedule for Development of WFOV/HUD 38

- 3.3-1 Logic Flow Diagram for Flat Panel LCD High Performance Color 43

3.3-2 Schedule for High Performance Color Flat Panel LCD Display 45

_ 3.4-1 Logic Flow for Small High Performance Color Programmable Multifunction

l } Display 47

3.4-2 Schedule for Small High Performance Color Programmable Multifunction

l

Switch 52

)

— — *•^------ __ ,, .°s:

.,, fit., ::
D483-10012-3

LiST OF TABLES

NUMBER Page

` 2.2-1 Facility Candidates for Integrating Controller System Modelling

Advancement Program 10

2.2-2 Resource for Space Station Subsystem Simulation Development Plan 13

2.3-1 Facility Candidates for integrating Controller Microprocessor

Interfaces Advancement 17

f 2.3-2 Resource Requirements for IC Expert System/Conventional Microprocessor

Software Interfaces 20

2.4-1 Facility Candidates forinferenee Processor 24

2.4-2 Resource Requirements for Development of Compact Lightweight Inference

Processor for Space Applications 27

3.2-1 Facility Candidates for Wide Field-of-View Head-Up Display 37

3.2-2 Resources for Wide Field-of-View Head-Up Display Development Plan 40

3.3-1 Facility Candidates for LCD Flat Panel Display Advancement Program 42

3.3-2 Resources for High Performance Color Flat Panel LCD Display 46

t 3.4-1 Facility Candidates for Programmable Switch Advancement Program 49

- 3.4-2 Resource Requirements for Small High Performance Color Programmable

Multifunction Switch 50

1

A
D483-10012-3

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

^.' ATP Authorization to Proceed

CAD Computer Aided Design

CAE Computer Aided Engineering

CPU Central Processing Unit

DMS Data Management System

i EC/LSS Environmental Control/Life Support System

ES Expert System

FAB Fabrication

F/O Fiber Optics

FY Fiscal Year

GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center

C - HOL Higher Order Language

IC Integrating Controller

IOC Initial Operational Capability

a 7PL Jet Propulsion Laboratory

JSC Johnson Space Center

C j LAN Local Area Network

LCLV Liquid Crystal Light Valve

LeRC Lewis Research Center

LED Light Emitting Diode

C

LISP List Processor

MBPS Megabytes per,Second

MHz Megahertz

MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NIU Network Interface Unit

NOS Network Operating System

NRZ NonReturn to Zero

OTC Operations and Check-Out

ROM

RTOP

Read Only Memory

Research Technology Objectives and Plans

SS Space Station

wi STS Space Transportation System

^3 Vll
D483-10012-3

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (Continued)

TCS Thermal Control System

TDRSS Tracking do Data Relay Satellite System

I

i

TMS Teleoperator Maneuvering System

viii
(

D483-10012-3

1.0 introduction

This volume of the final report for the Space Station Systems Technology Study

provides the technology advance(lont program plans for the critical or high priority

technology Items Identified in the system trade studies in Volume 11.

I

The flow diagram of Figure 1 .0-1 shows an overview of the major technology definition tasks and subtasks with their Interfaces and interrelationships. Although not

specifically Indicated on the diagram, iterations were required at many steps to finalize

the results. The development of the integrated technology advancement plan was

Initiated with the results of the Advanced Platform System Technology Study (APSTS)

and the results of two previous tasks in this study; i.e., the trade studies and the preliminary cost and schedule estimates for the selected technologies. Descriptions for the

development of each viable technology advancement were drawn from the trade studies.

Additionally, a logic flow diagram depicting the steps in developing each technology Item

was developed along with descriptions of each major element of that flow. Next, major

.J

elements were time-phased, allowing the definition of a development schedule consistent

with the Space Station program when possi iUle. E sheduies show the major milestones of

a 

the development programs including test required as described in the logic flow

diagrams. Cost and resource estimates were primarily based on experienced estimates

made by the various subsystem experts with consideration drawn from the FICA Price

hardware development cost modeling program. The results produced by the task are an

advancement plan for each selected technology that reflects technology status and

planning within NASA and industry. Consequently, an integrated technology advancement plan has been developed from the set of individual advancement plans and is

provided in this volume.

Advancement program plans were developed for the following areas:

a. Integrating Controller for Space Station Autonomy

b. Controls and Displays

The plans are similar in format for each technology area and specific technology

items within the areas. Each plan contains information on technical approach, facility

q requirements and candidate facilities, development schedules, and resource requirements

estimates.

^1

1

i
a?

I I I°

C

PE

C

rn

L"

a

L ^'

c tmD

E

a

G

iaD

^ a

O

IIIIIII

a IIIIIII

mach;

C C O rp

,E m7,E

a°^°'

0483-100123

CL

N

c

B

•a >C

c C N '6

gg

O Tl

c E o r aEi Cc di N2

^i a \ '^ m C c O. f- ^ •y c ^ ^, ^ ^' 'E ^ c ^a'^

m ^+ w

m

e

(T11 .^., Qp

T

1I

-M

eT, N

$'a NOc ve

C CA N

t C.2

C

 L C

ImL

cc° 44-c

♦

a

1

t

rC:j 1

•° E

Ewcr$ c

q_ g

rr

-E CD i E c c C `r F•`

°N

c

IZI CL T

mg ul CT z

^L ^Z c —

x 8

m L' 1

^^IIII

C O

E

a

w O

m

> c d a O

m C

rn a O O O

c

Fes- vt m

d ^i a^

N

N

O C

C ^

Oy

1pO.d

Y`O

DE

w

V m

CO m

^a

m;

TO

_Otl,V

2.2

2
2.0 INTEGRATING CONTROLLER

t 2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Integration of automated systems for providing Space Station utilities has been

Identified as a prime area for technology advancement. The issues addressed during this

Investigation wePe resolved in the Initial tasks of this study as reported in Volume 11 of

this final report. The benefits Include cost savings as well as safety, efficiency, and

1

enhancement to maintainability in Space Station design and operation. The controller

for each subsystems (I.e., electrical power, life support, thermal control, etc.) will

perform the actual control of the subsystem functions but the Integrating controller will

provide the priorities, constraints, and schedules which the subsystem will use. These

priorities, constraints, and schedules can be updated by the Integrating controller

whenever overall balance of the space station operations, missions, and subsystem

f performance indicates the need.

( The integrating controller will be developed in two phases, Phase 'i is intended for

the IOC Space Station. it will consist of the development of sttbsystem models designed

to evaluate state and mode conditions of seven prime subsystems and an overall Space

Station needs model. These subsystem models will continuously assess the current

operating conditions and synthesize the status information needed by the iC. The overall

station model will be operating concurrently to define the needs of the Space Station as

a whole. The actual functional conditions will be compared with the generated requirements and displayed to the astronauts and ground controllers. Initially, corrective action

will be determined and subsystem adjustments made by humans with the IC acting in an

advisory capacity.

Phase II will Incorporate the overall integration of autogomous functional control.

An expert system will be developed to perform the situation comparison task and

determine corrective action necessary through the use of encoded knowledge derived

from experts in the subsystem fields and the experience of the ground controllers and

astronauts Involved in Phase i.

in the trade studies, five technologies were identified as both critical to the integrating controller and lacking in maturity to support the needs of the Space Station.

They are:

Effective Space Station software simulation models,

- Real-time expert systems,

- Expert system/conventional microprocessor interfaces,
- Inherence processors for spacecraft applications, and

- X nowledge acquisition and representation techniques.

Research In current and planned activities In other government agencies and

Industry Is expected to provide some of the needed technology advancement, The

Defense Advaricid Researeh Projects Agency has established a Strategic Computing

(reference Strategic Computing, New Generation Technology: A Strategic Plan for

f

study

Its Development and Application to Critical Problems in Defense, AD-A141982). :n this

study the development of basic artificial Intelligence technology is planned } including

real time expert systems. This Is a large program in which 6 -10 research centers across

the country will be established with a staffing of approximately 100 professionals each.

Funding was planned to be $50M for FY84, $95M for FY85, $ 150M for FY88, and

unspecified amounts for the out years. The total amount for the first three years was

planned to be nearly $300M. Schedules show the development of a real time capabilit y

by quarter FY90 FY90. An initial one third to one half real time capability Is scheduled 

for completion in 4th quarter FY86. Since the expert system for the integrating

controller was originally Intended for an early to mid 90 's application to an evolutionary

form of the iOC Space Station, this program, when it is implemented, should provide

of the necessary technology development In this area within a time frame that will

htippurt the Integrating controller developments as previously planned In this Space

1 Station Systems Technology Study. Agreements to share the technology with NASA have 

already been made. Also, under the DARPA program, advanced knowledge acquisition,

representation, and Inference techniques are planned to be developed. Since develop

ments in these two areas for military ground and air systems should be largely applicable 

to spacecraft systems as well, only minimal technology work by NASA appears to be

justified. However, these activities are only planned at this time. A close monitoring of 

those programs as they proceed may be desirable to assure developments don't diverge

from NASA's needs.

The following sections describe plans for the three remaining areas In the list above,

effective Space Station software simulation models, expert system/conventional microprocessor interfaces, and inference processors for spacecraft applications. The plans are

presented as stand alone programs. However, in the case of the software Interface

development, the inference processor is the heart of the expert system which is one side

of the interface, and therefore must be available in order to design and build the

software. In the case of the Space Station and subsystem simulation development, the 

models produced by the technology program will be much more useful If produced using

hardware and software techniques resulting from the real-time expert system and the 
}

Inference processor programs. Initial model development using conventional techniques 

should be acceptable, though.

a C in summation, unless all five developments (two by DARPA and three by NASA)

above are pursued, critical pieces of technology will be missing in the other programs

{ that will severely decrease their usefulness, The plans have been presented in this

manner to take maximum advantage of technologies developed with the resources of 

other government agencles, and In so doing, allow NASA to use its technology resources

S

in other critical areas.

a

( 2.2 iC SYSTEM MODRLLiNG

The following discussion provides a technology advancement plan that is designed to

t develop technologies requiring advancement that are critical to the development of

t Space Station subsystem state and mode models. The subsystem models comprise the

F, Phase i concept for the iOC Space Station integrating controller. For a more complete

description of the Phase Ii integrating controller technology development plan, see

f Volume iII of the previous study, "Space Station Systems Technology Study"

(D180 - 27935-3). 

CI _ 2.2.1 Description and Benefits

A flow diagram to describe the steps involved to perform integrating controller

functions Is shown In Figure 2 .2-1. information is collected by the Integrating controller

from the astronauts, subsystem controllers, and from ground controllers. A state and

mode simulation will be run using these inputs and subsystem models to predict future

subsystem states. These models, one for each subsystem, are independent, discrete time,

discrete state models. However, the attitude control, electrical power, and thermal

management subystems may incorporate some continuous• state simulation elements as 

part of the models. 

A separate state simulation will be run producing descriptions of the state of the

Space Station and the needs for resources provided by the subsystems. Trend data and

other historical data are updated to reflect the latest collected information. A ( 1

comparison of the subsystem model outputs and space state needs will be made to detect

subsystem anomalies and to determine when changes of subsystem operation are

f required. Discrepancies are judged to be either life or mission threatening or non-

- threatening, and conditions are categorized as emergency or anomalous. When an

1

emergency condition exists, emergency commands will be generated and issued to the

- subsystem controllers. Subsystem change directives will be determined and Issued for

f^ any anomalous condition which exists.

5

1 CID
ms,l2!&,

q

§\

'E

\ 77 $ RW §i ° Qj 0 cWm kC

§§^{ f)^} %E

$m $i\2 ^k

@^7 §$E°

v

\u%} gJj g)/ E . ^ /

ZI

0 /E k W C . k )

@E

72

E£ m=

2

§ '0 '00 E

cl

®^ \k

_ §2

cgm$oe . E

8:3

^, gw^

40- . )^

e • k5^\j$\f$t§^$^%/

&
Complex modeling software Is a technology area necessary for the advancement of

an integrating controller system. The development of effective subsytem models

Involves detail definition of the systems to be modeled and is a. building block toward the

overall development of the integrating controller.

A major purpose of the Space Station Is to Implement new designs, concepts, and

methods that wilt reduce life-cycle costs, extend operational life and yield Improved

system performance. The development of an effective Integrating controller which

alerts each Space Station subsystem to potential failures and transmits reconfiguration

Information in the event of a failure so normal operations can continue supports this

objective.

Other benefits of an Integrating controller system for the Space Station are

numerous and Include the efficient use of resources and maintenance logistics, operations, and scheduling through the use of Inte grated management so that Space Station

operations are not interrupted. Resupply and maintenance cost saving due to the

Integrating controller are estimated at 1 25M over a 10-year mission.

2.2.2 Technical Approach

An overall logic flow for the program is presented in Figure 2.2-2. The numbered

Cblocks in the diagram relate directly to the steps outlined below. Each step describes

the tasks and subtasks associated with this technology plan.

STEP 1 Requirements Definition -This task involves several subtasks as outlined below:

a. Subsystem Definition - Specification of goals and objectives, and establishment of

system boundary conditions.

h b. Data Interface Requirements - Identification of necessary interface mechanisms

between controllers, astronauts, ground personnel, and models.

c. Programming Language Selection - Selection of simulation language based upon

evaluation of the characteristics of the model.

d. Real-time Software Capabilities - Deterministic study to assess the issues associated with translation of models into software suitable for real-time control.

STEP 2 Simulation Development - During the course of this task, eight models will be

developed in parallel. They include simulations of the attitude control, electrical power,

thermal management, life support, data management and communications subsystems

and also an overall Space Station mission and operations model which operates on

subsystem ,data, plus data from ground controllers and astronauts. The results

7
c

E 

O

++

c

O t2 CL

O 

M ..p 

'V

>

7

7

m

E m 

c Ov ` E

O (D © N +' rp O m O

IN

cO

N N 

^

E y ^0

CM CL

C

m

O

7

CM N

co3

a •'u

-o .E4-mIt .c o

ci -0 E 

E a) E._

41 GJ + t0 4,

_N

CLw

d

r:

CaOvOCOHv4HwmOiQ

.j0NNNvaR 

cON7

C1C

p14A 4

CA

N

T C ^NT

c a •,p ^o c

0@C:.- v a 'G ^oo- c

-g w 

(U

• •

m

8

11 rt
of these models will be compared to those of the Space Station predictor models to

a

determine where changes to subsystem operation are required. This task consists of the

r subtasks described below:

a. Model Formulation - Reduction of real system to a logical flow diagram.

b. Data Preparation - identification of the data needed by the model and their reduction to an appropriate form.

i c. Model Translation - Description of the model in a simulation language acceptable to

the computer to be used.

d. Real-Time Conversion - Adaption of model into software suitable for real-time

control.

1

STEP 3 Validation and Analysis - This task consists of the subtasks described below:

a. Modeling Validity - Evaluation of the model in order to develop an acceptable level

of confidence that inferences drawn from the performance of the model are correct

and applicable to the real world system.

b. Experimentation and Sensitivity Analysis - Execution of the simulation to generate

{ ', the desired data and performance of analyses to determine the level of model sensitivity to input parameters.

STEP 4 Design Evaluation and Modification- Each model will be modified to incorporate

any enhancements that may have been derived as a result of Step 3. Additionally design

parameters such as memory requirements, run time, software size, etc. will be assessed

to insure acceptabilty.

2.2.3 Facility Requirements and Candidate Facilities

1 Facilities requirements necessary to support the recommended development of

space station subsystem simulation models include a scientific computer facility to

develop software models using CAE techniques. Also interactive work stations should be

employed to accommodate verification of funetions. This facility would then be capable

to provide necessary support during final design and operational phases of the Space

Station.

_ Table 2.2-1 lists the NASA facilities that have capabilities pertinent to the various

j technology areas of space station subsystems. MSFC facilities specifically applicable for

fulfilling the development requirements are indicated with an asterisk. Other center

9
ID

CODE

TABLE 2.2-1

FACILITY CANDIDATES FOR INTEGRATING CONTROLLER SYSTEM

MODELLING ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM

NASA CENTER AND FACILITY NAME

Marshall Space Flight Center

Electronics Lab

*Control and Display Lab

Electronics Circuit Development Lab

*Microprocessor Applications Laboratory

Optical Test Lab

Optical Test and Fabrication Facility

Electrical Component Development Lab

Optical Shop for Fabrication of Optical Elements

*Microprocessor Laboratory

*Univae 1100/82

*Univae 1108 .

*IBM 360/75 General Purpose Computer System

*Digital Techniques Development Laboratory

*Electronic Development Lab's

*Data Systems Test and Development Laboratory

*Integrated Software Development Facility

*Experiment Data Systems Integration Lab

Payloads and Systems Test Laboratory

Ames Research Center

Central Computer Facility

Johnson Scace Center

4487-EC-11

4487-EC-12

4487-EC-14

4487-EC-16

4487-EC-20

4487-EC-24

4487-EC-35

4487-EC-45

4487-EC-48

4659-AC-1

4659-AC-2

4708-AC-1

4708-EF-8

4708-EF-11

4708-EF-13

4708-EF-14

4708-EF-20

4708-ET-10

N-233

440 Communications Component Development Laboratory

440 Command and Modulation Laboratory

15 Laboratory, Spacecraft Data Systems

440 Electro-Optical Television Systems

Langley Research Center

1268 Data Reduction Center

10
k

facilities have some of the same capabilities and could be used. Based on this review, no

new facilities should be necessary to s. pport the proposed development program.

t

2.2.4 Schedules

The major milestone schedules for parallel development of eight subsystem simulation models for advancement of the space station integrating controller technology and

the predictor models are shown in Figure 2.2-3. This schedule would be based (initially)

on an interactive control system with evolution to a more autonomous system for a

growth space station in the mid- to late 1990's. The evolutionary system would be

derived by integrating expert systems developments with the initial integrating

controller based on these subsystems modeling tasks. (The expert system developments

/ will not be available by the FY 87 phase C/D.) For a more complete description of the

t evolutionary integrating controller technology, see Volume i1 of this report and the

results of two previous studies "Advanced Platform Systems Technology Study"

(NAS8-34893) and "Space Station Systems Technology Study" (NAS8-34893, S/A No. 3).

2.2.5 Resources

The time-phased resource requirements estimated for the Space Station subsystem

model development effort are shown in Table 2.2-2. The cost of the Phase I program is

approximately $2M. This figure includes the 16 man-years (@ $120,000/man-year) for

development of the models plus an additional $60K worth of effort to select development

languages and develop real-time capabilities. This brings the total to approximately $2M

which was then allocated to the four tasks with the largest portion of $1.12M going to

the second task.

The Phase iI cost approximation of $2.12M as detailed in Volume iii of the previous

study, "Space Station Systems Technology" (NAS8-34893) which consists of the remainder of the developments necessary to accomplish Phase 11 and produce the autonomous IC

has been revised from $2.12M to $3M as a result of a better definition of the effort

required to produce the rules. The total cost for the IC technology development program

is $7M ($2M + $2M + $3M).

2.3 EXPERT SYSTEM/CONVENTIONAL MICROPROCESSOR SOFTWARE INTERFACES

The expert system, as described in Volume Ii, will poll the subsystem controllers

throughout the station for status information and send back mode control commands. In

order to accomplish this, the necessary OF codes in the microprocessors of the

subsystems must be identified along with the hardware specific characteristics such as

pin assignments and timing. This plan describes a technology development in which

0

11 
12

WN

aQ^

O

^. 4=

N ro

ccO

CO

Q

G

O

•^

C

O0

>NC

H

7Q 13 Al

in

JuN

cOC ``-

v

u ^ ,n O` CL L d

CL

^-

N

M

v

IL

NN

r6 LQN

to O

C.E

Q

v Ov

t Lam+

4a V_ u

roC

C IAa

G ro

cp O D D

cawcaE0

qjv0c0

invHC

,OwHUQHkbaVhMN

^Ia

O^

iz
t

F

8

(

11

CawWOWQC

,Ow

,EvNNHe0

SolVQHa0NN

a

O1OOctV

F^

CNE

C1NTNcO

.Z; mNvm

CL

vi0

CL aEN4+E0

O c O a

_O Y

4A 

m

C N

CA m 

-

T

7 E

1 Lu (%

-. r

^ N 

D483100123

ti

Q

W Ln

n

N

O

IM

^

^-

M ''-

ON

Ln Ln

N

N

Q

CDO

CDO

N

ON

r 00

N '-

N to

O

O

tD

N

M Ln

aQ

c0

0am, °J0

E

o0c0

}

CL o

E .. c

Ed

W

'0

o

>

5

'D

0v

O

rn

^L

IA

O

>

ND

m

Fm u

o N +m.' N M qq*

Gt a 

L

H

F- Q

13
several major components of the subsystems and the expert system processor will be

analyzed, and efficient software algorithms will be designed and developed to provide for

communications between them. In addition, a laboratory brassboard of the system will

be constructed and then used to validate the software. The plan assumes an existing

Inference processor will be supplied from outside the program for use in the brassboard.

2.3.1 Description and Benefits

The plan below describes a program that is concerned with system definition and

software development and testing. This Is an enabling technology for the integrating

controller and is justified to obtain the $54M in benefits over the 10-year Space Station

life that Is made possible by the Integrating controller. Since the interfaces software,

will be specific to the typical spacecraft hardware microprocessors and the inference

processor, no program outside of NASA Is likely to produce the same results as the

technology program described herein.

r 

2.3.2 Technical Approach 

An overall logic flow for this program is shown in Figure 2 . 3-1. The numbered

blocks relate directly to the steps outlined below. They describe tasks associated with

this technology from Initial architecture definition to validation and testing.

STEPS 1 and 2: Space Station Data Management and Integrating Controller Architecture 

Definition - In the first two steps, the structure (topology, protocol, etc.) of the

respective systems will be defined in order to provide an understanding of the

software/hardware that exists on both sides of the interface. 

STEP 3: Establish Partitions Between iC and CDMS Functions - The criteria for 

establishing which functions should be performed by the distributed microprocessor

controllers and which are better performed at the IC level will be defined. A conceptual

design of the interface software will be produced.

STEP 4: Identify Functional Interfaces Between All Software and Distributed Microprocessor Instruction Set - The identification of microprocessor instruction set members

that will be addressed by the interface software is the purpose of this task. The

instructions identified will be those required to accomplish the functional partitioning

identified in the previous subtask. Algorithms to perform the interface functions will be

derived.

14
98,!00!&,

(

(\{( ^ ^^^

\c$2^

.2 _

.%

CLt

$m

CL q U.Ju

{E\

§ c

§$

$%

k^

§ 2 S

AJ

L

d^

^

(U

a\

cr

c

%)

/§

2 4A

Cƒ

_C

n

k

AD

k .\

)

f32 ^-2

tA

L

f

ui

]{j ^ {\^t

Q; (U 2 \ ^ ^ $ ` 0 k

7^0

{

t

oC

2

{ OV

°

S t^2n\

§

aC

$

e

^\ #^^^\0

¥.)

/

w

CL

E4

1

t

72 vi 2.0

M

!,
STEP 5 and 8: Establish Hardware and Software Characteristics - A detailed description

of the computer codes and equipment on which it will operate will be performed in

preparation for the next task.

STEP 7: Software Development - The computer programs that will make up the

tuterface software set will be written from the algorithms produced in Step to the

specifications produced in the previous task. Codes will be developed, debugged, and

validated In this and the next task. in this task, the brassboard of the IC expert system

and the representative conventional microprocessors will be constructed. Initial

development of the software may proceed on conventional computer resources using

software development tools. When the brassboard hardware is completed, development

should shift to that system and be completed there.

STEP 8: Validation and Testing - In this step, the software is exercised to discover and

correct any remaining bugs, evaluate and extend the capabilities of the software to 

operate over a range of conditions representative of worst ease and nominal operations

of the Space Station, and to install streamlining and fault, tolerant features in the

programs. Iterations between testing and software redesign (Steps 7 and 8) are intended.

2.3.3 Facility Requirements and Facility Candidates

Facility requirements to support the development of iC expert system/conventional

microprocessor Interfaces include a scientific computer facility to develop initial models 

using CAE techniques. Also interactive workstations should be employed to accommodate verification of functions in an efficient manner. 

Additionaily, an electronics laboratory/workshop in which the brassboard components can be constructed, assembled, and tested will be required. The use of any existing

subsystem breadboards to evaluate these developments would be most beneficial.

Table 2.3-1 lists the NASA facilities that have capabilities pertinent to the various

technology areas of space station subsystems. MSFC facilities specifically applicable for

fulfilling the development requirements are indicated with an asterisk. Other center

facilities have some of the same capabilities and could be used. Based on this review, no

new facilities should be necessary to support the proposed development program.

2.3.4 Schedules

the major milestone schedules for this program are shown in Figure 2.3-2. The four 

year schedule shown has been derived to support development of a mid-1990's growth

Spa^e Station. Since the fully autonomous IC is not expected to be developed in time to

16 
TABLE 2.3-1

FACILITY CANDIDATES FOR INTEGRATING CONTROLLER/MICROPROCESSOR

(

\

INTERFACE ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM

ID

CODE NASA CENTER AND FACILITY NAME

Marshall Space Flight Center

^• 4487-EC-11 Electronics Lab

4487-EC-12 *Control and Display Lab

4487-EC-14 Electronics Circuit Development Lab

4487-EC-16 * Microprocessor , Applications Laboratory

4487 -EC-20 Optical Test Lab

4487 -EC-24 Optical Test and Fabrication Facility

4487-EC-35 Electr!edl Component Development Lab

4487 -EC-45 Optical Shop for Fabrication of Optical Elements

4487 -EC-48 * Microprocessor Laboratory

4659-AC-1 *Univac 1.100/82

4659-AC-2 *Univac 1108

4708-AC-1 *IBM 360/75 General Purpose Computer System

4708-EF-8

4708-EF-11

*Digital Techniques Development Laboratory

*Electronic Development Lab's

4708 -EF-13 * Data Systems Test and Development Laboratory

4708-EF-14 *Integrated Software Development Facility

4708-EF-20 *Experiment Data Systems Integration Lab

4708-ET-10 Payloads and Systems Test Laboratory

` Ames Research Center

( a

N-233 Central Computer Facility

_

Johnson Space Center 1 i

440 Communications Component Development Laboratory

440 Command and Mcdulation Laboratory

15 Laboratory, Spacecrat t Data Systems

440 Electro-Optical Television Systems

( Langley Research Center

1268 Data Reduction Center
18

c1

r_C

N+-0 +.j

c

w

a;E

vE

O

E

a

v

ucr

- 4-1 iQ VI-C

^v c ,+-

JwL .^ VULi vciV) vi>

4J

kAm

N

a. V

QI

1+. C

QI30NOHH

Q^VLa0c0cac0VENQXWz0

a,

a, r

IxN

Qj

o,
support the IOC station, this effort supports the development of the autonomous IC

during the initial operational phases of the station and would be put in place when the

modifications for the autonomous controller are made. Considering a phase C/D start on

the IOC station in the third quarter of FY87, the start date for this project could be as

early as one ;rear before IOC Space: Station phase C/D, in which case the Interface

(. definitions of this task would drive certain aspects of the inference processor development in the next plan. Alternately, the start of this program could be delayed until the

C

second year of the Interference processor development program. In that case some

aspects of the interface software design could be driven by the form of the inference

C processor defined in the other study. Some overlap of the phase C/D Space Station

program will be necessary. The program can be considered as having two phases:

(1) Data Management Architecture Definition

(2) [C Architecture Definition

(3) Establish Criteria for Partitioning Functions into Two Groups Above

(4) Identify Functional interfaces Between Al Software (2) and Distributed Microprocessors of (1)

ABOVE IS PRE-SS PHASE C/D WORK (4TH QUARTER FY87)

`J

)

(5) Establish Hardware Requirements

(6) Establish Software Requirements

(( (7) Software Development

E , j (8) Validation and Testing

ABOVE PICKS UP WITH START OF PHASE, C/D WORK AND RUNS

14 g CONCURRENT WITH 1T

2.3.5 Resources

The time-phases resource requirements estimated for this program are shown in

(

Table 2.3-2. The total cost estimate for this plan Is approximately $2M. This figure

1

includes the 15 man-years (@ $120,000/man-year) for steps four through eight plus, an

additional $240K to characterize the system architectures and define the functional

f partitions. This brings the total to $2.04M with the largest portions, $480K each, going

to the software development and testing tasks. Staffing and cost remains fairly constant

after the first year at five people/year or $600K/year.

Cost estimates for the overall development of the autonomous IC technology

consists of the $2M in this plan, the $2M in the previous plan for the system modeling,

and an additional $3M to cover the inference processor development and other items.

This brings the overall autonomous IC technology development cost to approximately

{{

19
uwNCv

OHLOd

u

`Oa 

w 

CdCEv 

nwV 

- 

40- 4C

v

o• IONN

ni

^iv

li4J WttoNt0Oq0CTO0O0 dO• 0

.- M N N 'V'

C

N

coa

N 00 cz

M

tOarnc°► °a O° M t0

C)O

N

O V1 V1

O

M to

W 

O O O

O

C-4

N

aHO

y.. L

01 of 

+ +I

C C C

4)

L

C Q7C

d

OE C 1A CL s

^—v

1 a iL Ol M

.ct^=^v^c raa,^a,o M M M 3 ".-

tf LAV

o

t0 C O

C $O UtJLL tnin= ut>

CL 75

4) M[1' V1 tO f--00 40

20
f $7M ($2M + $2M + $3M). This figure Is optimistic because it assumes that real time

expert system and advanced knowledge acquisition techniques will be developed and will

1. t be applicable to NASA's needs, by DARPA in the "Strategic Computing Initiative"

program. 

2.4 COMPACT LIGHTWEIGHT INFERENCE PROCESSOR FOR SPACE APPLICATIONS 

As described in Volume iI, the decision making component of the IC is the expert

system. The current state of the art in expert systems includes programming in

languages such as LISP on conventional virtual memory or supermini computers. An

f example Is the Space Station power system controller developed by Martin Marietta for

MSFC. The expert system just for that subsystem controller taxed the resources of a

c r VAX 11/780 computer. The IC expert system is expected to be several times the size

l (number of rules) of that expert system. Furthermore, the VAX computer is not designed

to optimize volume, weight, and power requirements or hardened against cosmic ray

single event upsets as spacecraft computer hardware must be. The need clearly exists

a for a large capacity, fast, computer for the S pace Station IC. 

t

2.4.1 Description and Benefits

p The plan below describes a program that is designed to pursue the development of an 

inference processor (the heart of the computer) that will have significantly higher

performance than existing processors through the use of the parallel and symbolic

processing techniques. Also, this processor will be designed from the start for use in a

spacecraft. Texas Instruments is pursuing the development of a similar processor and is 

jIl ^ expected to produce initial results in six years. However, the requirements driving that

design and the date of completion do not fully meet the needs of the Space Station

program. In order to provide the necessary technology for the late 1990's Space Station, 

advanced development in this area Is needed. This is an enabling technology for the

integrating controller. It is justified because it will obtain the $54M in benefits over the

10-year Space Station life that is made possible by the integrating controller. No

program outside of NASA is likely to produce the same results as the technology program

described herein.

C2.4.2 Technical approach

An overall logic flour for this program is shown in Figure 2.4-1. The numbered

blocks relate directly to the steps outlined below. They describe tasks associated with

developing a new type of microprocessor that will provide the computational speed

_ 21
\}\\/^}^/kkt/(3}kƒQi3f\\\^

Ew

w%

rr { & . g f 2

E& 9^

I'a CA /§z E M

.2

\ CL

Em0

vi, LL u %\5

m /

E 0

L)

\§^^k

me

4) §5

^)^^

(^ 2

#^ { 

m8,1G!&,
necessary to perform real time operations with the integrating controller's expert

system.

STEP 1 and 2: Initial Requirements Definition and Assessment of Existing Technology -

Available expert system technology will be characterized and compared with the needs

of a Space Station,

STEP 3: Conceptual Design - Conceptual design of the processor will be performed.

!

STEP 4: Fabrication and Component Testing - Prototype microcircuit components

! necessary to perform symbolic and numeric processing in parallel will be fabricated.

STEPS 5 and 8: Assembly and Processor Validation Testing -The components will be

assembled into a brassboard for subsequent validation.

2.4.3 Facility Requirements and Facility Candidates

j ,Facility requirements to support the development of a compact lightweight inference processor for space applications include a scientific computer facility to perform

,I conceptual design studies. Also interactive workstations should be employed to enable

fast and efficient development.

Additionally, an electronics laboratory/workshop In which the brassboard components can be constructed, assembled, and tested will be required. The use of any existing

subsystem breadboards in testing of the prototype processor would be most beneficial.

Table 2.4-1 lists the NASA facilities that have capabilities pertinent to the

devel.upment and building of microprocessors. MSFC facilities specifically applicable for

fulfilling the development requirements are indicated with an asterisk. Other center

facilities have some of the same capabilities and could be used. Based on this review, no

new facilities should be necessary to support the proposed development program.

2.4.4 Schedules

j The major milestone schedules for this program are shown in Figure 2.4-2. Tho six

year schedule shown has been derived to support development of a late 1990's growth

Space Station. Since the fully autonomous IC is riot expected to be developed in time to

support the IOC station, this effort suports the development of the; autonomous IC during

the initial operational phases of the station and would be put in place when the

modifications for the autonomous controller are made. Considering a phase C/D start on

the growth stat!:m at three to five years before IOC, the start date for this project must

23
TABLE 2 . 4-1 

FACILITY CANDIDATES FOR THE INFERENCE PROCESSOR 

ADVANCEMENTPROGRAM

ID

CODE NASA CENTER AND FACILITY NAME 

Marshall Space Flight Center

4487- EC-11 Electronics Lab

4487-EC-12 *Control and Display Lab

4487-EC- 14 Electronics Circuit Development Lab

4487-EC-16 *Microprocessor Applications Laboratory 

4487-EC-20 Optical Test Lab

4487-EC-24 Optical Test and Fabrication Facility

4487-EC-35 Electrical Component Development Lab

4487-EC-45 Optical Shop for Fabrication of Optical Elements

4487-EC-48 * Microprocessor Laboratory

4659-AC-1 *Univac 1100/82

4659-AC-2 *Univac 1108 

4708-AC-1 *IBM 360/75 General Purpose Computer System

4708-EF-8 *Digital Techniques Development Laboratory

4708 -EF-11 * Electronic Development Lab's

4708-EF-13 *Data Systems Test and Development Laboratory

4708-EF-14 *Integrated Software Development Facility

4708-EF-20 *Experiment Data Systems Integration Lab

4708-ET-10 Payloads and Systems Test Laboratory

Ames Research Center

N-233 Central Computer Facility

Johnson Space Center

440 Communications Component Development Laboratory

440 Command and Modulation Laboratory 

15 Laboratory, Spacecraft Data Systems 

440 Electro-Optical Television Systems

Langley Research Center

1268 Data Reduction Center

24
hC0vVQC1 Q

GJv

CLn0

a, Vnaavc

a^

a, ct

rn

a^ r4O

l^nG4O

a, O

^Ov7

Q)va

^l

QjL

D483-10012-3

111 vm

r14 i

_O ti} O N C ^

^ C

C^ Ol

E^ p1 N

^. C Z7

QC

NX ,0

O w O IW+'+^

^D C

vC'` CU -0 c 

QJ V1 Q

m

N (^

N

C Q U UQ

25

3
precede IOC by 9-11 years. Therefore, this development program requires a start fairly

soon or overlap of phase C/D of the growth Space Station program will be necessary.

2.4.5 Resources

The time-phased resource requirements estimated for this program are shown in

Table 2.4-2. The total cost estimate for this plan is approximately $3.7M. This figure

includes 30 man-years (@ $120,000/man-year) plus an additional $100K for equipment

and materials. This brings the total to $3.7M with largest portion, $1.2M, going to the

conceptual design task. Staffing and cost remains fairly constant at five people/year or

$BOOK/year.

Cost estimates for the overall development of the autonomous IC technology

consists of the $3.7M in this plan, the $2M for the system modeling, and $2M for the

interface software development. This brings the overall autonomous IC technology

development cost to approximately $7.7M ($2M + $2M + $3.7M). This figure is optimistic

as It is based on the assumptions that real time expert system and advanced knowledge

acquisition techniques will be developed and will be applicable to NASA's needs, by

DARPA in the "Strategic Computing Initiative" program.

26
c

,oVv

CL Qau4HUOaWU

L.Ckw

3NLL

,01

1.r m

CLEUkOGaEa0vvOkcvv

o• m

o:UN

0;

^vQ

^i

.Q 

a 

+^+

CD

10n V1000N0O

•- ^.N^-0^ 

W

M

^ t00 top O O

10

00 CD

0

O

0

^ ^^^-

I

co

0

m

N

CD

0

N

100 100

0 00

O

Ln Ln 0

.— ^ m

0

10

aj }

a

of00c

r c

(U

rn

G

c

C 'C 7 C N

C

Qo X 

3 .2 >,p

a, a 

m

,

C

CL

C Ol ^_ E

w

`^ O) 

V

W f0

.27

tl

4

?I

ff 1 l

^

i

CID
i^ 3.0 CONTROLS AND DISPLAYS

y 3.1 INTRODUCTION

The next three items covered in section 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 relate to the area of

controls and displays technology. The first, is the development of a head-up display

'• , device with a very wide field-of-view ( 60 0) to accommodate an operator at an OMV

teleoperator control station. While there Is a significant amount of effors being

expended in the development of new display techniques, no effort to widen the field-ofview to this extent has been Identified in industry or within government agencies. The

possible reason is a lack of specific requirement for a very wide FOV version. Typically

aerospace needs are satisfied by the wide field of view configuration (30 0) such as the

t one that has already flown in the Space Shuttle.

l The next two plans cover the emerging technologies in liquid crystal displays. The

first Is the development of large flat panel displays ( 8 inch diagonal) using LCD

technology to replace CRT screens. The second is the application of flat panel

technology to a switch. A single switch would be used for many purposes by

programming Its function and the label on the switch.

The requirements for these technologies and their benefits In an OMV teleoperations

workstation were Identified in the trade studies presented in volume 11 of this report.

The programs described in the following plans for controls and displays technology

advancements will provide the basic technology necessary to capture those benefits in

1

the Space Station.

3.2 VERY WIDE FIELD-OF-VIEW HEAD-UP DISPLAY

This technology plan concerns the development of a new very wide field -of-view

head-up display (WFOV/HUD) device which may be used in the proximity control of

vehicles. This item has been identified as beneficial in controlling an orbital transfer

vehicle (OTV) or the orbital maneuvering vehicle (OMV) In the Space Station operational

scenario. it is superior to conventional technology because It allows operators to

( simultaneously view the outside scene and computer-generated instrumentation

symbology. By doing so it reduces fatigue and the disorienting effects of shifting

concentration between two different areas in the workstation.

3.2.1 Descriptions and Benefits

/ The head-up display (HUD) is an instrument in which computer generated symbology

1 is projected onto a clear combining surface mounted in the operator 's field-of-view

(FOV). By projecting images into the FOV, the operator is able to simultaneously view

PRECEDING PAGE BLANI{ NOT FILMED

^, 29
the outside scene as well as the symbology. The technology for HUD development can be

divided Into two categories based on the required FOV:

a. Reflective/refractive optics for small FOV ( 150-200 FOV horizontal).

b. Diffraction optics for larger FOV (20 0-30 0 or greater FOV horizontal).

Typical HUDs for the reflective/refractive optics and the diffraction optics are

shown in Figures 3.2-1 and 3.2-2.

For the reflective/refractive optics HUD, dlsplays from a cathode ray tube (CRT)

are directed onto the combining surface by the relay lens, folding mirror, and collimating

lens. The collimating lens allows the displays to appear focused at ,infinity Instead of the

combining surface, thereby allowing the operator to view the outside scene and display

simultaneously without having to refocus his eyes. The significant disadvantage to this

type of system is that the available instantaneous FOV is restricted by the collimating

lens as shown in Figure 3 . 2-1. Therefore, techniques must be integrated into the design

or new methods for HUD image formation developed for increasing the available

instantaneous FOV.

Diffraction optics have been used in HUD development to increase the FOV. By

comparing Figure 3.2-1 and 3 . 2-• 2, It can be seen that the collimating lens is eliminated

as a component in the HUD device. (For diffraction optics, the collimating lens is part

of the combining surface.) As a result, the available Instantaneous FOV is Increased.

Controlled optical effects can be achieved by using the property of diffraction, In which

fringe effects are produced by the interaction of light with edges or slits. Light from an 

object containing Image Information such as a CRT is redirected by a diffraction

element in which the optical property Information such as direction and lens power is 

stored. The pioneer work in diffraction optics HUDS was done primarily by the Hughes

Aircraft Company and the Environmental Research Institute of Michigan (ERiM). ERIM

has limited their work to the fabrication of combiners and the development of computer

programs for ray tracing. Hughes Aircraft has built several development models using

diffraction optics HUD and has flight tested the device for the Swedish Air Force and for

the Precision Attack Enhancement program developed by Martin Marietta Corporation.

Marconi Avionics, Ltd. has been manufacturing diffractive optics since 1978. They were 

awarded a contract by the United States Air Force in 1980 to develop a new HUD 

incorporating diffraction optics for the F -16 and A -10 aircraft. THis system has a total

FOV of 30 0 horizontally and 20 0 vertically and an Instantaneous FOV of 30 0 horizontally

and 180 vertically. The efficiency of transmission of the display to the pilot will be

about 40 to 45% compared to 20% for the conventional HUD.

30. 
D483-10012-3

a

31

n

0

x

C

0

U 

r

N 

o^

C_

mN

O

M

(

r

r
dd

TN

D483-10012-3

32

A

Q^ JnS

Oim

a

a.00V i 

OvY

QaVw0NNv

Ol 
1 Because HUDs present all the Information required during maneuvers in the

Immediate FOV of the operator; the integratlori of HUDs Into the Space Station offers

significant benefits in the aren.s of Space Station - OMV maneuvers and other proximity

operations. By presenting all necessary Information in the operator's FOV, attentiondiversion problems and the continued eye reaccommodation by the operator Is lessened.

As a secondary benefit, the operator's workload and associated fatigue is decreased.

Allowing the operator to view the displayed Information as the proximity operations are

controlled enables rapid evaluation of the progress and decreased response time during

critical events.

In the trade studies performed by BAC to characterize a multifunction workstation

for the Space Station, the WFOV/HUD was identified as one of the technologies that

could lead to a reduction in manpower required to perform OMV, OTV, and spacecraft

servicing, flight operations, and functions. In a ranking of benefit over existing

techniques of the control and displays technologies, the WFOV/HUD was determined to

Chave relatively high benefits, but at relatively high cost when compared to the other

items. See volume 11 for a more complete discussion of the technology Items and

comparison of benefits and cost.

( 3.2.2 Technical Approach

An overall logic flow for this program is shown in Figure 3.2-3. The numbered

blocks In the diagram relate directly to the steps outlined below. They describe tasks

associated with this technology from Initial requirements definition, through prototype

development, to laboratory evaluation. This program features an overall workstation

layout effort combined with a direct effort in the development of WFOV/HUD

technology.

r

,

STEP It Initial Requirements Definition. The initial task of this study, this step will

provide the detailed •objectives and approach to WFOV/HUD and workstation development. Operational, functional, and ergonomic requirements on the workstation and an

initial test spec for the lab evaluation phase will be produced during this effort.

SUBTASK 1.1: Functional Requirements Definition. Concepts for the role of the

workstation and operator in the guidance, navigation and control of the teleoperated

vehicles and mechanisms will be defined, appropriate methods for performing the

functions of the workstation identified, and design requirements quantified to support

- the layout task.

33
D483-10012-3

c

ch VI

c O

CL a ^ G =

c '^• C'^M

° O o 'Avm

m

W.

cp m c C] o+ c0

m0'+O'+ c aM

N Y 'G M > > V 'C

o m o A u M UOx ..LL3LLJ

tn

c

O

G

N

c

w

C

N

t2

^ r0

O

m

rr.

O

rm

++ O C

Q. °'

Q. > OU- x

c

34

.0

V

c

m

r.

'.,O

m

a ^

N o

n .aN Cna

^ H O

c

O

f0

V

O 

E 

^

C^.

Gl 

N

v

n

0

x

^O

3

1:

E

IM

CA

0

0

U

O

nj

01

ii
SUBTASK 1.2: Operational Requirements Definition. The command and data nana¢ement, communications, and facility related requirements w'll be conceptually defined in

t the subtask. Software timing, accuracy, and interface requirements will be quantified.

SUBTASK 1 .2., Econc nic or Human Factors Requirements Definition. The design

aspects relating .to support of the operator from a human factors standpoint will h2

studle' to identify design requirements to alleviate '--tigue and improve operator

performance.

C STEP 2: workstation Cnneeptual Design. The r,:btasks below relate uirectly to the

development of workstation concept developed around and supportive to the WFCV/HUD

f work In task 2. A conceptual layout will be developed from the requirements established

In the previous subtasks. The layout will be documerted to a level sufficient to support

/

making the modifications to the laboratory eonfiguradon in :v:SFC's Robot:os crew

station facility. This effort will support evaluation of the WFOV/HUD to be developed In

1

the next task.

STEP J: WFOV/HUD Conceptual Design. The subtasks discussed below all relate

- specifically to the development of a prototype. model for subr,dquent laboratory evaluations.

` SUBTASK 3.1: Evaluation of Existing Technology. The recent developments in

teleoperator control technology discussed in section 3.2.1 above will be evaluated for

appiicability to extended field-of-view devices. Trade studies to identify the design

extensions or modifications necessary to meet the needs of the te:^operator workstation

will L., performed. BoV, diffraction and refraction/reflective techniques will be

considered.

t

SUBTASK 3.2: Conceptual Design. A design task for the prototype model will be

executed to produce specifications and drawings with a level of detail sufficient for

fn01-1cation of the device in the r:ext subtask. Trade studie 's will be performed to

determine a set of the best selections from design options (e.g., reflective, refractive, or

^ T ) diffractive, two dimensional or holographic imaging) for evaluation. Analytical simulation of visibility, transmission, and operator constraint3 will be performed to support the

selection process.

35

K
t 

SUBTASK 3.3: Fabrication and Checkout. In an appropriate shop facility a working

models of the WFOV/HUD will be developed and their functions and operations checked

out prior to delivery to the test lab.

STEP 4: Testbed Modification. Looking ahead to the workstation evaluation of the

WFOV/HUD model prototypes, preparations will begin early by identifying the necessary 

modifications to the existing crew station testbed to support the design requirements

i established in the workstation and WFOV/11UD subtasks above (2.4 and 3.2 respectively). 

The necessary support equipment and fixtures will be fabricated and installed before

delivery of the prototype test models. Some mods may have to be delayed to avoid 

interference with other tests being performed in the lab, but equipment and supplies can

be stored nearby.

STEP 5: Testbed Evaluation and Design Upgrade. Finally, the prototypes will be 

delivered to the lab and installed with the workstation modifications. The functions of 

each HUD/workstation configuration will be verified per requirements established in

Task 1 and the evaluation testing will proceed. Tests should include evaluations with a

sufficiently large sample size of subjects in all the necessary proximity and remote 

operational scenarios required of the OMV including satellite servicing from the shuttle 

and Space Station, Space Station maintenance and servicing operations, and deployment/retrieval operations. Additional tests for control of the OTV and manipulators may

also be performed for each configuration and operator subject. Following completion of

the tes': program, the results will be evaluated to identify the best candidate prototype

and suggest design upgrades for the actual WFOV/HUD and workstation. 

3.2.3 Facility Requirements and Facility Candidates 

Facility requirements to support the development of a wide FOV HUD are extensive.

They include clean rooms, dark rooms, display panel simulation laboratories, precise 

optical benches, vibration stabilized laboratory, optical facilities for the production of

precision optical devices, and computer facilities.

Table 3.2-• 1 lists candidate NASA facilities which have capabilities which will

support this development program.

3.2.4 Schedule

The major milestones for the development of the WFOV/HUD are shown in Figure

3.2-4. The estimated +Imefram es for each major step is shown. This schedule could

support a 1992 iOC date for the Space Station by completing technology in time to

36
oTABLE 3.2-1

FACILITY CANDIDATES FOR WIDE FIELD-OF-VIEW HEAD-UP DISPLAY

ID CODE NASA CENTER AND FACILITY NAME

MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

4487 Active Optics and Computer Aided Design Laboratory

4708 Checkout Control Complex

4708 Checkout System Electrical Support Equipment

4708 Class 10G,'! 00 and Class 10,000 Clean Room

461', 4663, 4491 Computer-Operated Simulation Facility

4487 Data Systems Test and Development Laboratory

l _ 4708 Electrical/Electronics Parts and Components Test Area

4728 Electronic Equipment Development Laboratory

rr 4487 Large-Scale Integrated Circuit Development Laboratory

4,+87 Optical/Digital Image Processing Facility

4487 Optical Fabrication Shop

4487 Optical Test and Fabrication Facilities

C 4487 Remote Manipulator Systems R&D Laboratoryi

4708 Mission Avionics and Control Simulation Facility

4487 Simulation Laboratory, Control System

4487 Electronics Guidance and Control Development Lab

4481 Vibration Isolation Platform Facility

JOHNSON SPACE CENTER

.t4 Electro-Optical and Laser Laboratory

16 Simulation Laboratory

9A Mockup and integration Laboratory

1

15 Physical Optics Laboratory

GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

5 Holographic Diffraction Grating Laboratory

0

0

3%
D483-10012-3

38

N

m

d C

} C

cn

v ^ r o,h

C^ N= OaiS

E > or- 4) 0

a o` ^

a,rom+'v

N rO N

^^..^wZ

tm

.. . .

V

O

w

C

d

E 

a

0

v

v

4

w

r m

v

4N
support the phase C/D start in the first quarter of 1987, provided ATP occurs on the date

shown. it is anticipated that should the need arise, this program could be compressed

Into a 12 month period at the minimum by limiting the number of prototypes tested and

the number of workstation configurations, operator subjects, and tasks in the test.

3.2.5 Resources .

C

The time phased resource requirements estimated for the WFOV/HUD are shown In

Table 3.2-2. The cost of the program through the testbed analysis is approximately

$1.782M of that total, $1.68M is estimated for labor (14 man-years x $120,000/manyears) plus $102K for materials and supplies. Final design definition and flight

qualification for the Space Station is considered part of the Space Station program and is

i not addressed in this technology advancement program.

3.3 HIGH PERFORMANCE COLOR PLAT PANEL LCD DISPLAY

CCurrently, Cathode Ray Tubes are used widely for large screen workstation displays.

In recent years LCD displays have been appearing in many applications where CRT's have

been traditionally used (television screens, computer monitors, etc.). However, the

largest version of the screen is approximately 9 inches diagonally. Space Station

CP 

4 workstations have a need for larger displays due to the large amount of data requiring

simultaneous d!splay. A survey of the leading manufacturers of LCD displays was made

to determine- if a larger screen was in development. None of the companies contacted

indicated any interest or intention in developing a larger device, primarily because the 9

inch screen satisfies their requirements and significant technical problems must be

overcome to enlarge the screen further. The most significant technical hurdles include:

decreasing element size to allow high resolution (80-100 lines per inch) graphics,

decreasing the rise/fall time until It is comparable to a CRT ( .1 second) to alleviate

ghosting problems, increasing luminescence so that it functions well in a normal 35-50

foot-candle environment, increasing the angle at which it can be viewed from the

current 200 to around 45 0, and solving color saturation problems.

_ 3.3.1 Descriptions and Benefits

LCD displays have several advantages over CRT's that are particularly important in

spacecraft applications. Among these are a significant reduction in size (depth) and

power requirements. Conversely LCD's have very few disadvantages compared to CRT's.

f ) Color capabilities and service life are at least comparable. The technical approach

described below defines a program to solve the current limitations of LCD displays listed

C)

39
40

+^+N Ln IOA 000 ONO

0

ONO

r rCtl11 C1'

M N 

0V

N

N W 000 ccn OM N N Ln O O O O .- N M N 00 r

CLQ4`-

ON

C

0W! C C C C 4r T V M C ^ O ^ M

W ^' 

atil

O

NY

_`

y C

7 u O0^ ++

CL ^

N M d

N

0^

I

jT03O

4.vL5

as

a;

^iN

n'1

12

D483-10012-3
in the previous section and to produce a prototype high performance color flat panel

display.

3.3.2 Technical Approach

II An overall logic flow for this program is shown in Figure 3.3-1. The numbered

tom ' blocks In the diagram relate directly to the steps outlined below. They describe tasks

associated with this technology from initial requirements definition, through prototype

^. development, to laboratory evaluation. This program features an overall workstation

layout effort combined with a direci effort in the development of large LCD display

( technology.

P STEP 1: Initial Requirements Definition. Functional, operational, and ergonomic

requirements for the display will be established.

STEP 2: Conceptual Design. Investigations will focus on enhancement of current

techniques to provide high resolution graphics (80-100 lines per inch), fast rise and fall

time ( .1 seconds), sufficient luminance (35-50 foot-candle environment), and an

Increase In color saturation.

C

STEP 3: Brassboard Design and Fabrication. includes design and fabrication of a

( brassboard model.

STEP 4: Testing. Testing of the display model will be performed in a workstation

testbed. Finally, the flat panel display/workstation will be used to evaluate the design

using a number of test subjects performing a variety of control and display tasks, with

( several different workstation layouts.

t 3.3.3 Facility Requirements and Facility Candidates

Facility requirements to support the .recommended developments are as follows:

(1)laboratory/shop facilities where a display prototype and testbed components can be

fabricated, assembled, and checked out, and (2) Space Station multifunction control and

display testbed.

Table 3.3-1 lists the NASA facilities which have capabilities pertinent to the various

areas of control and displays development. Based on this review, no new facilities should

!P ,

I

be necessary to support these development programs.

41
TABLE 3.3-1

FACILITY CANDIDATES FOR LCD FLAT PANEL DISPLAY ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM

ID CODE NASA CENTER AND FACILITY NAME

MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

4487 Active Optics and Computer Aided Design Laboratory

4708 Checkout Control Complex

4708 Checkout System Electrical Support Equipment

4708 Class 100,000 and Class 10,000 Clean Room

4610, 4663, 4491 Computer-Operated Simulation Facility

4487 Data Systems Test and Development Laboratory

4708 Electrical/Electronics Parts and Components Test Area

4728 Electronic Equipment Development Laboratory

4487 Large-Scale Integrated Circuit Development Laboratory

4487 Optical/Digital Image Processing Facility

4487 Optical Fabrication Shop

4487 Optical Test and Fabrication Facilities

4487 Remote Manipulator Systems R&D Laboratory

4708 Mission Avionics and Control Simulation Facility

4487 Simulation Laboratory, Control System

4487 Electronics Guidance and Control Development Lab

4481 Vibration Isolation Platform Facility

JOHNSON SPACE CENTER

14 Eleetro-Optical and Laser Laboratory

16 Simulation Laboratory

9A Mockup and Integration Laboratory

15 Physical Optics Laboratory

GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

5 Holographic Diffraction Grating Laboratory

42
11I

cn

C 1 a C C N I

cn

`

N

^N 1 ` I 0 1 m 1

cn

i ^

CC

3 ^ i

C

I J

y

N

d N 1 01

W

C 1 

Z

4

M

u

4C- ' CL a c C J `

N

O '.L..iN m 4z

C 1 N

^

^ 1 V1 I

QI1 1 _ 1

CL

;;c

43

caVCAt

C

I

1

10a0QJda

tiOVuEaz\wuMva
3.3.4 Schedule

The major milestones for the development of large high performance color LCD

displays are shown in Figure 3.3-2. The three year schedule shown has been derived to

support development of the IOC Space Station. Considering a phase C/D start in the

third quarter of FY87, the start date for this project must occur fairly soon. Some

overlap of phase.0/D will be necessary. Coordination with the current OMV program's

ground based workstation development and evolution of that system to a shuttle based

workstation is suggested.

3.3.5 Resources

The time phased resource requirements estimated for the LCD flat panel display are

shown in Table 3.3-2. The total cost estimate for this plan Is approximately $1.2M. This

figure Includes 10 man-years (@ $120,000/man-year) plus an additional $25K for equipment and materials. This brings the total to $1.225M with the largest portion, $3001(,

going to the testing. Staffing will grow from two to five people over the course of the

program.

3.4 HIGH PERFORMANCE COLOR PROGRAMMABLE MULTIFUNCTION SWITCH

Another application of LCD display elements Is In the small display area of a

programmable switch. By having the capability to change the function (resulting action)

of a switch and the label on it, a single switch can be used for many purposes. This

reduces the total number of switches required in the vehicle, saving weight, volume, and

wiring complexity. Redundancy can also be achieved at a lower cost penalty.

3.4.1 Descriptions and Benefits

Current programmable multifunction switch technology utilizes light emitting diode

(LED) components. However, an LED element switch requires 1-2 watts of power while

a similar LCD device requires only 0.1 watts. Considering a typical workstation layout

of 500-100 of these switches in each of the five or six habitable modules of the Space

Station over a 10-year life, a reduction in requirements of KW can be achieved. Using

the estimated cost of power NASA will charge experiments (per KW), a total of $ M in

resources can be made available to sell to experiments that originally was needed for

basic Space Station systems.

3.4.2 'Technical Approach

An overall logic flow for this program is shown in Figure 3.4-1. The numbered

blocks relate directly to the steps outlined below. This figure shows the steps involved in

44
S

45

41

D483100123

G

O_

-NC

.0

(^

a^C

N /fl CaE C

a, A

O rn

Cv

^, Cv^^

L'

. ov

C

v1

a,

vi

4QQv

a,cR

^o00v

a^Uc

^O

rZO4ra2

QI bt

cu\U►i
4040 co° $ $ :13 $ 0 8 N

- - - - - N m N

N _ o m

m m ^ ry

Cl

N

k}k^ okn

co _ co k $

- CY

% .

^

'FE 2

m

r c c

E -6

a c E c 2

sue:

, c

IA°M22

CL

\ /\\\ \^

Iu.,,..

^§ ƒ$^ \dm% ) m e w

AM

^

2

c

a

}

\

§

k

k

%

f

/

k

\

\

k

$

\

^

12

&83400!&,

«
C)

^ K^

r

.^:^..

^ \

^

^

^

^

(

) 

, 7 

§

t

\

p----®-------, §

5 

o

a I \ 

^.

( 

c ©

^

Win . e

z ^'

ui m Q.

. -j q ^

^ ^ 5 I ^ c $ § 

M

\0

o 

$ ^^ § § \ }

\ 10 °% 2

m 2 m . t

.S c c . E §3 \ 

i 2

. 44 ca ) 

l 2 \ 

^ ^_ n %

^

w ?I 3 °

^ _ ------- .---^

E

\ 

. 4
developing a programmable switch device that has resolution, luminosity, and can be

viewed at wide angles, but is lower in weight, volume, and power. They describe tasks

associated with this technology from initial requirements review, through prototype

development, to laboratory evaluation. This program features an overall workstation 

layout effort combined with a direct effort in the development of large LCD display

technology. -

STEP 1: initial Requirements Definition. Functional, operational, and ergonomic

requirements for the programmable switch will be established.

STEP 2: Conceptual Design. investigations will focus on enhancement of current

techniques to provide high resolution graphics (80 lines per inch), sufficient luminance 

(35-50 foot-candle environment), and an increase in color saturation.

STEP 3: Brassboard Design and Fabrication. Includes design and fabrication of a

brassboard model.

STEP 4: Testing. Testing of the programmable switch model will b:: performed in a

workstation testbed. Finally, the programmable switch/workstation will be used to

evaluate the design using a number of test subjects, performing a variety of tasks 

requiring programmable switches, with several different workstation layouts.

3.4.3 Facility Requirements and Facility Candidates

Facility requirements to support the recommended developments are as follows: 

(1) laboratory/shop facilities where a prototype and testbed components can be fabricated, assembled, and checked out, and (2) Space Station multifunction control testbed.

Table 3 . 4-1 lists the NASA facilities which have capabilities pertinent to the various

areas of controls and switch development. Based on this review, no new facilities should

be necessary to support these development programs. 

3.4.4 Schedule

The three year schedule shown in Figure 3 . 4-2 has been derived to support

development of the IOG Space Station. Considering a phase C/D start in the third

quarter of FY87, the start date for th!s project must occur fairly soon. Some overlap of 

phase C/D will be necessary. Coordination with the current OMV programs 's ground 

based workstation development and evolution of that system to a shuttle based

workstation is s:I.ggested.

48
TABLE 3.4-1

zy FACILITY CANDIDATES FOR PROGRAMMABLE SWITCH ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM 

ID CODE NASA CENTER AND FACILITY NAME

MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

4487 Active Optics and Computer Aided Design Laboratory

4708 Checkout Control Complex

4708 Checkout System Electrical Support Equipment

4708 Class 100,000 and Class 10,000 Clean Room

4610, 4663, 4491 Computer-Operated Simulation Facility 

- 4487 Data Systems Test and 'Development Laboratory 

S\ 4708 Electrical/ Electronics Parts and Components Test Area

4728 Electronic Equipment Development Laboratory 

4487 Large-Seale Integrated Circuit Development Laboratory

4487 Optical/Digital Image Processing Facility 

4487 Optical Fabrication Shop

C. 4487 Optical Test and Fabrication Facilities 

F - 4487 Remote Manipulator Systems R&D Laboratory 

4708 Mission Avionics and Control Simulation Facility 

4487 Simulation Laboratory, Control System 

C4487 1h.!ectronles Guidance and Control Development Lab

J

4481 Vibration isolation Platform Facility 

l

JOHNSON SPACE CENTER

14 Electro-Optical and Laser Laboratory

\ - 16 Simulation Laboratory

9A Mockup and Integration Laboratory 

_ 15 Physical Optics Laboratory

GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

5 Holographic Diffraction Grating Laboratory

49

z-
D483-10012-3

m

N

>

a

c

0

c

4-

-v c

^o

c c c c

E

QJ V 01 

m N

C aJ c

ip 0 ucn

c

7 w C N

CL C "

0 On

a, 0 3 0 -0 c

t° tj %A 6A .^

c u m ^-

V

3

c

0

c

n,

.o

ro

ro

o,0

4

0

0

V

a, V

C

ro

a

CL

r

o,

z

0

a,

G1

t

uH

ti

Q

n'1

C1

50
3.4.5 Resources

The total cost estimate for this plan shown in Table 3.4 -2 Is approximately $800K.

This figure includes 6.5 man-years (@ $ 120,000/man-year) plus an additional $16.25K for

equipment and materials. This brings the total to $ 796.25 with the largest portion,

$195K, going to the testing. This program, being very similar to the previous flat panel

study, but smaller and not as demanding in response time performance, has been

estimated at 65% of the flat panel study cost.

^j

51
LA

i0 I^ 1D t0 t0 ^O

r M M M M M IA %0 C r as O1 41 M 01 01

r r (^

it CD N ^

M M w M LA co N IT M M m

r M

co %0 N 00 k0

^N

00 N

r r co r r

C

O

m

0/ O v

C

N

"0

^

C

m

d OC Q)

v v +' ui

0c u

rr

41

4A

IV cu

CL C .0 i O O1

L ro v c 3 0^ c ro

C 0> > .^ O

,N

O

N

_

C

0^J^IJm ICi fN 

z

,p 

E 

V

W 

r0 

cu

^

V

a 

52